Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon vs. Modesetting DDX Driver Performance On Ubuntu 16.04

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Espionage724
    replied
    Originally posted by gururise View Post
    Any benefit to using one driver over the other at this point? Being forced to upgrade to 16.04 from 15.10 soon, and will be forced again to switch from fglrx to radeonsi. I would like to choose the driver that will continue to allow me to run most of my steam games. Are either of these drivers more compatible than the other with steam games?
    The open-source graphics driver works and should be fine with majority of games (either on-par or better than fglrx). Some games may require a few command-line tricks to run though (like GL overrides, and that libstdc++ or w/e thing for Steam itself).

    Leave a comment:


  • gururise
    replied
    Any benefit to using one driver over the other at this point? Being forced to upgrade to 16.04 from 15.10 soon, and will be forced again to switch from fglrx to radeonsi. I would like to choose the driver that will continue to allow me to run most of my steam games. Are either of these drivers more compatible than the other with steam games?

    Leave a comment:


  • drSeehas
    replied
    Originally posted by Espionage724 View Post
    "Older chips don't have the necessary functionality to support glamor." Which chips? I run modesetting on a HD2400 currently, but perhaps older chips means even older than that? ...
    Yes. HD2400 is R600 generation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mangix
    replied
    The way I've come to understand it is that the modesetting driver is more "direct". That is, it's a wayland equivalent for X11 in terms of requiring KMS.

    Leave a comment:


  • Scias
    replied
    Originally posted by Ericg View Post

    The DDX drivers control which version of DRI you use, and therefore how the images get displayed on the screen. Pretty sure DRI still affects performance even without a composited WM running

    That makes sense for DRI2 vs DRI3, but modesetting is slightly ahead of radeon-DRI3 despite both using the same DRI version, that's the thing I don't really understand since the 2D/DDX codepaths shouldn't matter in games.

    Leave a comment:


  • atomsymbol
    replied
    Originally posted by Scias View Post
    I don't really understand why there is or even should be a difference between using the modesetting or radeon/nouveau DDX drivers as these are the X drivers hence not used for gaming/3D stuff...
    I don't understand it either, however the evidence presented in the article leads me to believe that examining the software architecture and the source code of X+drivers+Mesa+etc closely would reveal what is causing the differences in performance. It must be there somewhere in the software, somebody "just" needs to find it and then optimize the code.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ericg
    replied
    Originally posted by Scias View Post
    I don't really understand why there is or even should be a difference between using the modesetting or radeon/nouveau DDX drivers as these are the X drivers hence not used for gaming/3D stuff... unless the benchmarks are done windowed and in a composited WM ?
    The DDX drivers control which version of DRI you use, and therefore how the images get displayed on the screen. Pretty sure DRI still affects performance even without a composited WM running

    Leave a comment:


  • Scias
    replied
    I don't really understand why there is or even should be a difference between using the modesetting or radeon/nouveau DDX drivers as these are the X drivers hence not used for gaming/3D stuff... unless the benchmarks are done windowed and in a composited WM ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Serafean
    replied
    Originally posted by Espionage724 View Post
    "Older chips don't have the necessary functionality to support glamor." Which chips? I run modesetting on a HD2400 currently, but perhaps older chips means even older than that?

    "R600 and newer could eventually move to -modesetting once all the features from -ati get ported to -modesetting." What features are missing?
    I'd wager r300g class hardware. xf86-video-ati supports even those grandpas
    Last edited by Serafean; 23 April 2016, 09:39 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Espionage724
    replied
    "Older chips don't have the necessary functionality to support glamor." Which chips? I run modesetting on a HD2400 currently, but perhaps older chips means even older than that?

    "R600 and newer could eventually move to -modesetting once all the features from -ati get ported to -modesetting." What features are missing?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X